It's Time For Term Limits

Government of the people, by the people, and for the people can mean any kind of government. It’s our duty to make it mean only one kind uncorrupted, free, united. - John Josephus Grant, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court played by Frank Morgan in the movie, A Stranger in Town. 

By Rich Kozlovich 

Recently a writer who claimed to be a conservative also claimed there were valid conservative arguments against term limits. As far as I was concerned his arguments against term limits are inaccurate, and truth be told, is one great big red herring fallacy. 

The arguments supporting term limits are; they get old, they get ineffective, but most importantly, they get rich, they get connected, they get corrupt, they get egos so out of control, they can't be reasoned with, and they get gutless, many of whom start out gutless and it becomes a way of life as a legislator.

The one most missed is once they're there, they get re-elected over and over again in spite of their failures, and those failures are legion. And yes, it is right to make it a law to tell voters they need elect someone else, and bring an end, or at lease reduce the number of life long professional politicians, something the founding fathers never wanted or even expected. They never even expected to see national parties.

The idea term limits make it impossible for activists to become effective, is hardly an argument against term limits, and the idea lobbyist love term limits is inaccurate. I was active in my industry's trade associations in Ohio and a bit at the national level. We have term limits in Ohio and things get done much better, so the lack of institutional knowledge is a red herring fallacy. In point of fact, term limits created less complicated government, and all the lobbyists I know hated term limits.

Term limits means they have to start all over again creating influence. As for the unions, interest groups, and corporate interests being the real power, that's also a red herring. They're less powerful with new elected officials as they have to make their pitch over and over again, because new representatives are new opportunities for those in opposition with each other to make their arguments, and the new ones listen.

Term limits do not check voters rights on politicians, it expands them, and this malarkey about we end up losing good ones, while that's true, the fact is losing the bad ones is far more important, because the really bad ones have been an unending disaster, like Schiff, Waters, Pelosi, McCarthy, McConnell, and the list goes on endlessly, on both sides of the aisle. With term limits the damage bad ones can do is limited, and it forces voters to pay attention and "exercise their authority" wisely.

Any argument against term limits is nothing short of an effort to rationalize the corruption of the current system and what doesn't work to the benefit of the nation.